Change war shield function

I’ve made this suggestion before but can’t seem to find the thread.


The war shield function is really silly at the moment. When two alliances fight each other, and if the gap on strength is extremely big, war shield is not needed. When two similar strength alliances who could afford war shield fights, then top 8 players are all shielded from both sides. There’s no game decision or depth to gameplay because you just avoid those shielded players altogether.


What Flare should do is, when a player attacks a shielded base, the player cannot use scrolls at all. He can only use revive.


This way, it add depth and strategy to the game. When a super close battle between two alliances is ongoing, a player will then have to decide if he wants to take the risk of attacking the top shielded player for the extra 8 skulls (100 vs 92) in COF. Such decision carries the risk losing the battle without having the opportunity to use scrolls at all. This is definitely more interesting than just “oh, top 8 players shielded, no tough decision, just avoid all top 8 shielded players altogether”.

Shields should “always” be used on the most targeted players.

In the vast majority of situations, shields are best used on the 8 weakest players (independently of their ranking within the alliance), since they’re the most targeted players. This forces the opposition to target stronger players and, potentially, losing raids and/or spending more gems.

However, when the top3-4 alliances (RL, VL, Japan Team X and Todes) are going against each other, shielding the top8 is a better choice, since they’re the most targeted players. But this is only relevant in 1 or 2 war maps in each war season.

Outside of those 4 alliances, even if it’s a rank5 vs rank6 alliance, shielding the 8 weakest players will save you more skulls than shielding the top8.


Having said that, your idea sounds fun and would add another element in wars between the top4.


Well, what I suggested works on those who shield the weakest 8 too. Imagine shielding the weakest 8, and players are like “hmmm I intended to fight the weakest initially, but now they are shielded and if I made a mistake I can’t scroll to save the raid… should I still attack the weakest or go for those just a little stronger but I get to scroll instead?”

I can only see the reason why you would shield the weakest players in your alliance when everyone’s already giving max skulls.  If your alliance is not at that level then you aren’t shielding the weakest players but the players who are the most targeted, which could always vary. 

I think it would be cool if Shielded players paid out the same but had special boosts that made them harder to beat.   The suggested one is pretty cool.  How about also making the time to complete the battle 15 seconds shorter too? 

I also think it would be cool if alliances could not see who was shielded in other alliances.  Alliance members would have to communicate with each other on who was Shielded.